Those like me? I don't think so, you have the wrong guy.
I know plenty of people without guns who don't want a ban on guns and they support the Second Amendment. Some of them have their LTC but do not own a gun, YET. I am not sure how you can conclude that I think everyone without a gun wants them banned. You are making things up exaggerating obviously. You also don't take me seriously , so why should I take you seriously.

Maybe you need to explain who are the" Their " your referring to or are you exaggerating who these "Their" people are?

Their goal is a ban period, it may take generations but that is their goal. And if you don't see it, it is because you are blind, indoctrinated, brainwashed or too stupid to see the results of history.

So if the argument is there're necessary to repel a tyrannical government who is armed to the teeth with combat issue rifles what was the point again?

You're making the point of why the Founders wanted the people to have weapons that would enable them to resist any government which attempted to do away with their natural and unalienable rights, and which would destroy the Constitution which protected those rights.

The ability to resist and overcome a tyrannical government originally created by the people and their representatives has been chipped away at to the point that it seems hilarious to you to even refer to it. But it is still there. It is still, despite your snarky, evil, laughter, still there. Even though the Second Amendment has been severely harmed and limited, it is still there . . . and is still a thorn in the side of those who want to create peace, harmony, equality, and freedom from hunger and want for all of us and for the whole world.
.
And the chipping away has not been just at the Second Amendment, but, necessesarily against the Constitution as a whole, and at the character of the American people by dividing them and bribing them into submission with entitlements and wealth transfers and by changing our demographic makeup by importing a massive influx of dependents from socialist type cultures who reproduce at much higher rates. And by creating a Progressively larger centralized government with a regulatory stranglehold on the economic sector.

The process has been incremental, and it still would be very difficult for the federal government to suddenly proclaim by legislative or judicial fiat that the Constitution was suspended and all power would rest in the elected Central government administered by its appointed regulatory agencies. There are enough people, even in the military, that would resist such a move. The process of change by judicial fiat legislation from the bench, supported by propaganda must still continue until the process is peacefully accomplished.

So it is not so ludicrous to believe, even at this time, that an armed public and a divided military would be able to resist and overcome a tyrannical government.

And Progressives know this, so will continue to finish, by political process, changing us into their ideal of a thoroughly administered system of government run by their idea of experts who know better what is best for the people of this country and of the world.

Voting, and some socialistic notion of "Democracy," might still exist, but the choices will be limited to those who rise up in the political ranks of whatever and whoever are considered the experts. Or the mere formality of voting for those who are basically already in power and between whom there is little difference in regulatory "policy" could legislatively and/or judicially, or by regulation, just be eliminated.

Hey, It might well be the best system for "our time." We evolve. Humans will be different from what they used to be. Or not.

Yeah. There has certainly been chipping away at our personal freedoms and liberties. The government has more control over a woman’s ovaries than any AR-14 gun owner....Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yeah. There has certainly been chipping away at our personal freedoms and liberties. The government has more control over a woman’s ovaries than any AR-14 gun owner....Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So if the argument is there're necessary to repel a tyrannical government who is armed to the teeth with combat issue rifles what was the point again?

Not to mention, how often are selective fire weapons used in full auto?

The general population, with existing sporting rifles, would be sufficient to hold any theoretical tyrannical takeover by government. Particularly a government that's military has taken an oath to Constitution, not some party.

As for selective fire, they are more used in 3 burst mode or full auto than any AR15 that cannot do anything beyond one pull pf trigger per round. But you already know that (I think).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe

Yeah. There has certainly been chipping away at our personal freedoms and liberties. The government has more control over a woman’s ovaries than any AR-14 gun owner....Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Unable to determine is the sarc close tag is intentionally missing, so I'll bite. Gee Eben, How so?

Come on John.. your a smart man. You want a gun? You go in and buy a gun. You want bullets? No problem. A woman wants birth control? Hold on... let’s consult her employer’s religious beliefs first. Was she raped and wants to abort the rapist’s offspring? Let’s see if the government will let her do that. Some states make it very difficult and if some had their way they would outlaw it completely because a baby is a gift from god and a miracle.Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Come on John.. your a smart man. You want a gun? You go in and buy a gun. You want bullets? No problem. A woman wants birth control? Hold on... let’s consult her employer’s religious beliefs first. Was she raped and wants to abort the rapist’s offspring? Let’s see if the government will let her do that. Some states make it very difficult and if some had their way they would outlaw it completely because a baby is a gift from god and a miracle.Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually, it is easier to buy birth control than it is to buy a gun. You can, as you say, "go in and buy some birth control . . . no problem." But you can't just "go in and buy a gun." Some paperwork has to be done and you have to be qualified, among other obstacles. But if you're talking about insurance paying for birth control . . . well . . . actually, I think it is even an more difficult to get an insurance policy that will pay for your purchase of a gun than it is to get an insurance policy that will pay for your birth control.

your splitting hairs... i can walk into a gun store and buy a shot gun or a long gun no questions asked.. no? I know in RI if i want a hand gun i need to pass a gun safety test. but a shotgun... no problem.

Come on John.. your a smart man. You want a gun? You go in and buy a gun. You want bullets? No problem. A woman wants birth control? Hold on... let’s consult her employer’s religious beliefs first. Was she raped and wants to abort the rapist’s offspring? Let’s see if the government will let her do that. Some states make it very difficult and if some had their way they would outlaw it completely because a baby is a gift from god and a miracle.Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

your splitting hairs... i can walk into a gun store and buy a shot gun or a long gun no questions asked.. no? I know in RI if i want a hand gun i need to pass a gun safety test. but a shotgun... no problem.

No Eben, if you want to buy a shot gun in RI you go to your LGS, buy it, fill out a bunch of forms, have your personal information floated by your local PD (yes) where they run your info against the national back ground system with the Feds and see if there is anything disqualifying there. Then you get to wait 7 days.

Besides, if you walked into your LGS you might need to lie on the form (ATF Form 4473) about partaking in certain, umm, substances .

your splitting hairs... i can walk into a gun store and buy a shot gun or a long gun no questions asked.. no? I know in RI if i want a hand gun i need to pass a gun safety test. but a shotgun... no problem.

uh, NO

there are questions asked

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.

Maybe you need to explain who are the" Their " your referring to or are you exaggerating who these "Their" people are?

Their goal is a ban period, it may take generations but that is their goal. And if you don't see it, it is because you are blind, indoctrinated, brainwashed or too stupid to see the results of history.

maybe but I think you are bright enough to understand who they are. I am speaking of the control freaks and we all know who the control freaks are

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.

In Vermont I can walk into a gun shop and after a phone call to ATF and a payment walk out with any legal firearm. Is that bad? More than 1 suicide happened last year the day a gun was bought, you decide.
Our rights come at a cost to society paid by individuals.
I’m concerned that choosing a hard line may preserve the status quo for now but will end with the repeal of the second amendment.
Time will tellPosted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In Vermont I can walk into a gun shop and after a phone call to ATF and a payment walk out with any legal firearm. Is that bad? More than 1 suicide happened last year the day a gun was bought, you decide.

I see your point. You had a suicide there last year. That should be enough reason for the other 300+ million of us to decide to give up our rights. God . . . the horror . . . what if you had two suicides?!! What on earth could we give up to make up for that?

Our rights come at a cost to society paid by individuals.

Now I understand why Progressives don't like us to have rights not approved of by the government. They come at a cost to society paid by individuals. Very logical. The Founders should have thought of that. Karl Marx and Putin are obviously wiser than they were.

I’m concerned that choosing a hard line may preserve the status quo for now but will end with the repeal of the second amendment.
Time will tellPosted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why are you concerned? It would obviously be a good thing to get rid of those pesky rights thingies. They come at a cost to society. Imagine how rich society would be if rights, except those "reasonable" ones that government allows us to have, were eliminated. Probly could wipe out that unsustainable debt we've created as a result of us having too many rights.

In Vermont I can walk into a gun shop and after a phone call to ATF and a payment walk out with any legal firearm. Is that bad? More than 1 suicide happened last year the day a gun was bought, you decide. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If a person wants to kill themselves they are going to do it, regardless of whether they get a gun that day or not. the evil there is not the gun, its depression.

I've personally known 5 people that tried to commit suicide, 4 succeeded, none of them used a gun.

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."

all i hear from you and other 2a supporters is the same broken record Their coming for our guns .. I ask who and your this is your answer ?

we all know who the control freaks are.. No we dont lets hear some names names maybe an organization or is this more deep-state voodoo

Wayne,it's a good thing that you pay attention to politics. Can I ask what you were doing when your educators explained the difference between THEY'RE, THERE and THEIR?Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The following organizations have lent monetary, grassroots or some other type of direct support to anti-gun organizations. In many instances, these organizations lent their name in support of specific campaigns to pass anti-gun legislation such as the March 1995 HCI “Campaign to Protect Sane Gun Laws.” Many of these organizations were listed as “Campaign Partners,” for having pledged to fight any efforts to repeal the Brady Act and the Clinton “assault weapons” ban. All have officially endorsed anti-gun positions.

AARP AFL-CIO Ambulatory Pediatric Association American Academy of Pediatrics American Civil Liberties Union American Academy of Ambulatory Care Nursing American Medical Women’s Association American Medical Student Association American Medical Association American Association for the Surgery of Trauma American Trauma Society American Federation of Teachers

American Association of School Administrators American Alliance for Rights and Responsibilities American Medical Association American Counseling Association American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry American Academy of Pediatrics American Association for World Health American Ethical Union American Nurses Association American Association of Neurological Surgeons American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences American Firearms Association American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

American Jewish Committee American Trauma Society American Psychological Association American Jewish Congress American Public Health Association Americans for Democratic Action Anti-Defamation League Black Mental Health Alliance B’nai B’rith Central Conference of American Rabbis Children’s Defense Fund Church of the Brethren Coalition for Peace Action Coalition to Stop Gun Violence College Democrats of America Committee for the Study of Handgun Misuse & World Peace Common Cause Congress of National Black Churches, Inc. Congress of Neurological Surgeons Consumer Federation of America Council of the Great City Schools Council of Chief State School Officers Disarm Educational Fund Environmental Action Foundation Episcopal Church-Washington Office Friends Committee on National Legislation General Federation of Women’s Clubs Gray Panthers H.M. Strong Foundation Hadassah Harris Foundation Hechinger Foundation Interfaith Neighbors Int’l Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union Int’l Association of Educators for World Peace Jewish Labor Committee Joyce Foundation Lauder Foundation Lawrence Foundation League of Women Voters of the United States* Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Manhattan Project II Mennonite Central Committee-Washington Office National Safe Kids Campaign National Association of Police Organizations National Coalition Against Domestic Violence National Black Nurses’ Association National Association of Chain Drug Stores National Network for Youth National Assembly of National Voluntary Health & Social Welfare Organizations National Association for the Advancement of Colored People National Association of School Psychologists National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners National Association of School Safety and Law Enforcement Officers National Education Association National Association of Public Hospitals National Coalition Against Domestic Violence National Association of Secondary School Principals National Association of Social Workers National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Related Institutions National Association of School Psychologists National Council of La Raza National Center to Rehabilitate Violent Youth National Commission for Economic Conversion & Disarmament National Council of the Chur ches of Christ in the USA National Council of Negro Women National Association of Community Health Centers National People’s Action National Education Association National League of Cities National Council on Family Relations National Council of Jewish Women National Organization for Women National Political Congress of Black Women National Parks and Conservation Association National Peace Foundation National Urban League, Inc. National Parent, Teachers Association National Urban Coalition National SAFE KIDS Campaign National Organization on Disability NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby Peace Action People for the American Way Physicians for Social Responsibility Project on Demilitarization and Democracy Society of Critical Care Medicine Southern Christian Leadership Conference The Council of the Great City Schools The Synergetic Society 20/20 Vision U.S. Catholic Conference, Dept. of Social Development Union of American Hebrew Congregations Unitarian Universalist Association United States Catholic Conference United Methodist Church, General Board & Church Society United Church of Christ, Office for Church in Society* United States Conference of Mayors War and Peace Foundation Women Strike for Peace Women’s National Democratic Club Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND) Women’s Int’l League for Peace and Freedom World Spiritual Assembly, Inc. YWCA of the U.S.A.Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why are you concerned? It would obviously be a good thing to get rid of those pesky rights thingies. They come at a cost to society. Imagine how rich society would be if rights, except those "reasonable" ones that government allows us to have, were eliminated. Probly could wipe out that unsustainable debt we've created as a result of us having too many rights.

I'm concerned because i think that eventually my children will not have the right to have guns.
My other concern is that many of the same people who are concerned about having gun rights think that people do not have the right to:
Burn a flag
Build a house
Do any drug they want
Not pay taxes
Have a boat
Eat horses
Have or eat a dog
Have more than one wife
Distill alcohol

You are talking about a handgun. :moon:Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No Eben - in order to purchase a gun in Mass you must already have a gun permit (FID Card) - which means you have gone trough all the forms, background checks, and processes plus have waited one to two months (or more) in order to get the card.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I'm concerned because i think that eventually my children will not have the right to have guns.
My other concern is that many of the same people who are concerned about having gun rights think that people do not have the right to:
Burn a flag
Build a house
Do any drug they want
Not pay taxes
Have a boat
Eat horses
Have or eat a dog
Have more than one wife
Distill alcohol

Interesting list. Missed your point - you want your kids to be able to do whatever drugs they want? Eat your dog?

Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
I'm concerned because i think that eventually my children will not have the right to have guns.
My other concern is that many of the same people who are concerned about having gun rights think that people do not have the right to:
Burn a flag
Build a house
Do any drug they want
Not pay taxes
Have a boat
Eat horses
Have or eat a dog
Have more than one wife
Distill alcohol

Interesting list. Missed your point - you want your kids to be able to do whatever drugs they want? Eat your dog?

No, just that all those things can be done in some other countries.
We are not quite as free as we like to think.